w at all. That the colonies had
been settled by convicts, was a common impression among the best educated.
While residing in Paris Cooper had the gratification of having his country
quoted in the French Chamber of Deputies as an example of the (p. 087)
possibility of forming respectable communities by the transportation of
criminals. Even men who sympathized with republican institutions, he
informs us, did not think of denying the fact; they denied merely the
inference. The brilliant publicist, Paul Courier, had asserted it would
be as unjust to reproach the modern Romans with being descendants of
ravishers and robbers, as it would be to reproach the Americans with
being descendants of convicts. All could not be expected, however, to be
so liberal as this constitutional reformer. The gross vices which in
foreign opinion distinguished the inhabitants of the United States, were
held to be the natural consequences of their settlement by felons.
Cooper subsequently took care to furnish the sons of the Puritans with
all needful information as to the light in which their fathers were
viewed in Europe. At the time, however, it was far different. Keenly
sensitive to his country's honor, and knowing the morals of his
countrymen to be far higher than those of the men of any other land,
derogatory statements of this kind were galling in the extreme.

But it was the English opinion that Cooper resented most bitterly. This
was partly because he believed from the community of origin and speech
it ought to be better informed, and partly because he looked upon it as
responsible for many of the absurd and erroneous impressions that
prevailed in the rest of Europe. His feelings were rendered still keener
by the direct contact with English prejudice which he had personally
during his residence abroad. The attitude of the Continent towards
America was that of supreme ignorance and indifference. But there was at
the time something besides that in the attitude of England, so far (p. 088)
certainly as it was represented by its periodical literature. In the
most favorable cases it was supercilious and patronizing, an attitude
which never permits the nation criticising to understand the nation
criticised. There was never any effort to penetrate into the real nature
of the social and political movements that were taking place on this
side of the water. Men were contented with the examination of mere
external phenomena, which, whether good or